Observational studyPloS one2021
Automatic real-time analysis and interpretation of arterial blood gas sample for Point-of-care testing: Clinical validation.
Observational study in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
13 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Advancing Nursing Education: Evaluating Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Escape Room (ER) Approaches for E-Learning and Interpretation Skills.Nursing research and practice · 2026Article
- Article
- Hyaluronic acid-based microgels loaded with fluticasone furoate for bleomycin-induced acute lung injury treatment.Materials today. Bio · 2025Article
- The Role of Kidney Function in Predicting COVID-19 Severity and Clinical Outcomes: A Retrospective Analysis.Infectious disease reports · 2025Article
- Interpretation of acid-base metabolism on arterial blood gas samples via machine learning algorithms.Irish journal of medical science · 2025Article
- Analysis of arterial blood gas values when discarding different volumes of blood samples in an arterial heparin blood collector during thoracoscopic surgery.BMC surgery · 2024Article
- Electrolyte Disturbances Related to Sodium and Potassium and Electroconvulsive Therapy: A Systematic Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Review
- Lab at home: a promising prospect for on-site chemical and biological analysis.Analytical and bioanalytical chemistry · 2023Article
- Electrolyte disturbances in a sample of hospitalized patients from Iraq.Journal of medicine and life · 2022Article
- The effect of heparin concentration on results of venous blood gas of patients admitted to cardiac intensive care unit: A double-blind clinical trial.BioMedicine · 2022Article
- Diagnostic Modalities in Critical Care: Point-of-Care Approach.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Review
- Systemic acidemia impairs cardiac function in critically Ill patients.EClinicalMedicine · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
18 authors at 7 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPoint-of-care arterial blood gas (ABG) is a blood measurement test and a useful diagnostic tool that assists with treatment and therefore improves clinical outcomes. However, numerically reported test results make rapid interpretation difficult or open to interpretation. The arterial blood gas algorithm (ABG-a) is a new digital diagnostics solution that can provide clinicians with real-time interpretation of preliminary data on safety features, oxygenation, acid-base disturbances and renal profile. The main aim of this study was to clinically validate the algorithm against senior experienced clinicians, for acid-base interpretation, in a clinical context.
methodsWe conducted a prospective international multicentre observational cross-sectional study. 346 sample sets and 64 inpatients eligible for ABG met strict sampling criteria. Agreement was evaluated using Cohen's kappa index, diagnostic accuracy was evaluated with sensitivity, specificity, efficiency or global accuracy and positive predictive values (PPV) and negative predictive values (NPV) for the prevalence in the study population.
resultsThe concordance rates between the interpretations of the clinicians and the ABG-a for acid-base disorders were an observed global agreement of 84,3% with a Cohen's kappa coefficient 0.81; 95% CI 0.77 to 0.86; p < 0.001. For detecting accuracy normal acid-base status the algorithm has a sensitivity of 90.0% (95% CI 79.9 to 95.3), a specificity 97.2% (95% CI 94.5 to 98.6) and a global accuracy of 95.9% (95% CI 93.3 to 97.6). For the four simple acid-base disorders, respiratory alkalosis: sensitivity of 91.2 (77.0 to 97.0), a specificity 100.0 (98.8 to 100.0) and global accuracy of 99.1 (97.5 to 99.7); respiratory acidosis: sensitivity of 61.1 (38.6 to 79.7), a specificity of 100.0 (98.8 to 100.0) and global accuracy of 98.0 (95.9 to 99.0); metabolic acidosis: sensitivity of 75.8 (59.0 to 87.2), a specificity of 99.7 (98.2 to 99.9) and a global accuracy of 97.4 (95.1 to 98.6); metabolic alkalosis sensitivity of 72.2 (56.0 to 84.2), a specificity of 95.5 (92.5 to 97.3) and a global accuracy of 93.0 (88.8 to 95.3); the four complex acid-base disorders, respiratory and metabolic alkalosis, respiratory and metabolic acidosis, respiratory alkalosis and metabolic acidosis, respiratory acidosis and metabolic alkalosis, the sensitivity, specificity and global accuracy was also high. For normal acid-base status the algorithm has PPV 87.1 (95% CI 76.6 to 93.3) %, and NPV 97.9 (95% CI 95.4 to 99.0) for a prevalence of 17.4 (95% CI 13.8 to 21.8). For the four-simple acid-base disorders and the four complex acid-base disorders the PPV and NPV were also statistically significant.
conclusionsThe ABG-a showed very high agreement and diagnostic accuracy with experienced senior clinicians in the acid-base disorders in a clinical context. The method also provides refinement and deep complex analysis at the point-of-care that a clinician could have at the bedside on a day-to-day basis. The ABG-a method could also have the potential to reduce human errors by checking for imminent life-threatening situations, analysing the internal consistency of the results, the oxygenation and renal status of the patient.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.